WeeklySA_AdminCOURT PRESSED TO GIVE REASONS IN ZUMA CASE
In a move that seeks to protect the integrity of the electoral process, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) has now turned to the Constitutional Court to challenge the Electoral Court’s decision allowing former President, Jacob Zuma to contest this year’s general elections.
The IEC exercised its legal rights to seek clarity from the apex court arguing that if the matter was not finalized before elections, there was a risk of a person who is not qualified being allowed to contest elections.
The latest development followed calls from the IEC and the judiciary watchdog organization, Freedom Under Law (FUL) for the Electoral Court to urgently furnish reasons for overturning the IEC’s decision to bar Zuma from taking part in the general elections as a candidate.
The IEC had upheld an objection that Zuma should be disqualified because of the law that precluded anyone who had committed a criminal offence and sentenced to more than twelve months imprisonment, from contesting in the elections.
Zuma was found guilty by the Constitutional Court of contempt of court and sentenced to 15 months imprisonment on June 29, 2021 after he had defied this court’s orders that he appear before the State Capture inquiry.
The former President’s lawyers successfully appealed against the IEC’s decision after heated arguments were presented in the Electoral Court this week by Senior Counsels, Dali Mpofu ( for Zuma) and Tembeka Ngcukaitobi , who appeared for the IEC. The Court issued an order a day after these proceedings directing the IEC to reverse its decision of barring Zuma from contesting elections. No reasons were furnished.
Shortly after the verdict was pronounced, the FUL, which did not question the order, argued that the rule of law required that courts should give motivated reasons for their decisions.
This was also due to the fact that the legal arguments by the two advocates bordered mainly on the interpretation of the law especially the law pertaining to the remission of sentence granted to Zuma by President Cyril Ramaphosa and that the IEC had no powers to enforce the law that prohibited Zuma from contesting elections because of his criminal record.
By delivering their ruling as promptly as they did, the Electoral Court obviously knew the magnitude of this judgment which – if not challenged – would set a precedent in deciding cases of a similar nature in future.
It was therefore imperative to also give reasons for their decision so that the IEC in particular, would in future know how to deal with such matters.
The delay in providing reasons has placed the IEC in a precarious position of not knowing if they might be allowing a disqualified candidate to contest elections.
The Constitutional Court, which is urged to attend to this matter as urgently as possible, should give the answer.
The nation should not be suspended for too long on this matter. They need closure.
